Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trump Unity Bridge

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Consensus is this passes WP:GNG and there were no policy based rationales for the delete votes. (non-admin closure) -- Dane ^talk 22:49, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trump Unity Bridge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not a notable bridge. Media coverage is paltry to non-existence of the 'News of the Weird' variety. Fails to be notable. jps (talk) 01:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I created this stub while expanding the Mother of All Rallies article, after doing a quick Google search and finding several articles about the trailer. From what I can tell, this vehicle's journey is actually being chronicled somewhat closely, with a few incidents happening along the way. The subject may very well be notable, but I admit, more research is needed here. The article was nominated for deletion very soon after being created, and is not at its fullest potential. I ask discussion participants to please keep this in mind before commenting. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:48, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or possibly redirect to Mother of All Rallies if it is deemed worthy there. Guy drives around a Trump-emblazoned truck, gets a whiff of press that fades. Not worthy of a separate article. TheValeyard (talk) 04:14, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as clearly non-notable. Shelbystripes (talk) 05:17, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:05, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:05, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:05, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not notable and confusing. How is this a bridge? Legacypac (talk) 09:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @Legacypac: The article may be confusing, but this just means there is work to be done to improve the prose and clarify the subject. Simple Google searching yields many, many sources that could be used to expand this stub. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:11, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep plenty of sustained coverage in RSes establishes GNG notability. A simple web search for "Trump bridge Cortis" turns up examples well before and continuing after Mother of All Rallies (M.O.A.R.): from WUSA January 18, to Cedar Rapids Gazette August 19, to Detroit News, September 18.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Above !votes "press that fades" "clearly non-notable" and "confusing" are merely personal opinions and are factually untrue and/or not policy based reasons to delete. I might consider merging if a) a policy based reason were put forward and b) RSes about this subject post M.O.A.R. can't be found. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with Bri here. "Press that fades" and "confusing" are personal opinions and not policy-based reasons for deletion. No doubt the article needs work and further expanding, but this discussion needs to be based on sourcing and not the current state of the article. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:06, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (disclaimer: article creator). I'm formally casting my vote to keep this article, per WP:GNG. This may just be a man driving a truck, but his journey has received sufficient news coverage in reliable sources to justify a standalone article. His path has been closely followed, and sources describe the truck's appearances at multiple notable events, as well as incidents that have happened along the way. Redirecting to Mother of All Rallies is not appropriate, as this was just one of many appearances. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:09, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is plenty notable. If the article needs work, fine, but it needs to stay. Carptrash (talk) 17:35, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per comments above and the assurances of the page's creator that the page will be expanded. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:47, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and merge to Pro-Trump Demonstrations; there is some coverage, but topic is not encyclopedia and coverage/notability is marginal for a stand-alone article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:18, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The amount of coverage and sources seem fine, and will only grow. This is a mobile work of art, and if it stays intact and continues making the rounds for four years it could probably end up in the presidential library (gold-plated presidential library with fountains and peacocks and a shoe-hall), so its notability has been established and will gain in time. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:06, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd like to comment on redirecting Pro-Trump demonstrations, then I'll try not to chime in here again. IMO, voting to redirect to this article is not taking into account that the article is majorly underdeveloped. There have been many pro-Trump demonstrations that need to be added, and merging details from multiple articles like March 4 Trump, Mother of All Rallies, and Trump Unity Bridge is not practical, as the article would become too long very quickly. I've even started Trump Free Speech Rally, which is yet another notable pro-Trump event, and Patriot Prayer has organized other rallies in support of the president. In short, I'm asking discussion participants to consider the potential of these standalone articles and not just the current Trump Unity Bridge and Pro-Trump demonstrations articles. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 05:37, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pro-Trump Demonstrations per Gregory. Jdcomix (talk) 17:57, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This article is well-sourced, and there has been reliably-sourced coverage of this float for about a year already -- there is too much coverage for too long a time span to convince me that this article's subject is not notable. Besides, this article's creator is a very experienced editor, with numoerus FAs and GAs listed on his user page, and I thus have faith that he will expand and improve the article (and it is already a decent article). --1990'sguy (talk) 22:18, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Passes WP:GNG, qualifying for a standalone article per a review of available sources. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:44, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.